ma_testfandomcom-20200214-history
Talk:Prototype (episode)
FA status FA nomination (30 Aug - 07 Sept 2005, Success) ;Prototype (episode) Self-nomination'I think having my stuff run alongside Defiant's has given me an inferiority complex, because they keep getting longer and longer. Only beat me by 10kb this time! Anyway, I think this is one of the best I've done. --Schrei 01:11, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC) *'Suppot Tobyk777 23:14, 30 Aug 2005 (UTC) *'Support' --Scimitar 11:59, 31 Aug 2005 (UTC) **'Comment', is the teaser really in the correct POV? It does refer to the viewer, and the screen, even if it is sorta POV of 3947. - AJHalliwell 23:47, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC) ***You know, I read Gv's comment on latinum and I think I just realized how pointless it is to go into play-by-play detail considering it's just a summary - most people have seen the episode, and those who haven't probably aren't looking for a novel. Anyway, I originally kept referring to the camera/3947 as "it" or "the object," but it sounded really awkward, so dunno if there's a way to fix this. --Schrei 00:40, 3 Sep 2005 (UTC) ::::That's assuming "most people" have seen the episode. Which, being four years ago when this comment was made, they probably have not. I love restarting half-decade old talks.--Obey the Fist!! 16:40, February 24, 2010 (UTC) FA removal (26 Oct - 16 Nov 2010, Success) Prototype (episode) It's got a rambling summary and a bg info section that, (at least) in my opinion, is not written from the right perspective; it's the episode that's under discussion, not the robots! So, I suggest changing the headings & possibly rearranging some of the info, but the info itself can (at least more or less) stay. --Defiant 09:45, October 26, 2010 (UTC) :I cleaned up the background section a bit by putting the more traditional "Story", "Production", "Continuity" etc. headings. Feel free to improve on these. I added a couple of citation requests because some information appears to be assumed rather than based on production info. If they were cited, I'd say the background section would be reasonable enough for a Featured Article; not every episode has as much interesting stuff as say, . I agree that the wall of text makes a mockery of the term "summary", so unless that is trimmed, and the background cited properly, I support removal.– Cleanse ( talk | ) 10:29, October 26, 2010 (UTC) :Support. or Conditional Support. The summary section is way too long. Unless that is shortened to be more concise, this article should not be FA. – Distantlycharmed 17:51, October 29, 2010 (UTC) Archived on this date.--31dot 21:27, November 16, 2010 (UTC) Technobabble "Parts of this episode, particularly the first act, are often cited as an example of Voyager's heavy reliance on technobabble. " Cited by who? If no one objects, I'm going to delete this.--EnterpriserNX01 Unneeded :*''The ultimate fate of the Pralor and Cravic is unknown. It is plausible that the Pralor units were able to salvage Torres' work on the prototype unit, although it is equally plausible that the Cravic unit destroyed the Pralor ship.'' — Morder 04:47, 3 June 2009 (UTC) Robot vs. Android I changed all words of "android" to "robot" becuase I do not believe that sentient thought from a robot means that it has become an android which can think on it's own. It is very clear that the Pralor robots are programmed, highly programmed, but still they are constrained by their original programming. 2 questions Did the Automated unit not record how to make more? He was told to do so. Does Belanna not feel the Doctor is sentient? :I'm not sure, but such observations are nitpicks which we do not put in articles.--31dot 10:13, April 20, 2010 (UTC) Removal of 2 notes I removed the following 2 notes from the bg info section: * The plot of this episode was inspired by by Isaac Asimov, a friend of Gene Roddenberry and science consultant for . His robots, like androids in the Trek universe, had a "positronic brain." It is likely that Asimov gave his blessing to the use of the term "positronic" in TNG and hence, after thereby establishing it in Star Trek canon, to later Star Trek such as "Prototype." * The plot of this episode may have also been loosely based upon the story "The War to End All Wars" written by Arthur Bernard Lewis for Star Trek: Phase II. These are not only speculative and desperately requiring citation but the first of the 2 notes is just plain wrong; although it implies that the term "positronic" is used in this episode, it is never referenced. --Defiant 14:23, November 9, 2010 (UTC) Costume error Didn't anyone notice Harry wearing 2 pips when he says they should take a break?--Meepmeep189 (talk) 06:10, May 5, 2013 (UTC) :That would be a nitpick if true. 31dot (talk) 10:23, May 5, 2013 (UTC)